Search results

While broader property-type categories of real estate markets have been scrutinized at microeconomic level in some segments – namely, residential, retail, industrial and hospitality, there is limited evidence showing that local office markets can be viewed as monolithic and economically integrated entities. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how occupiers differ in their willingness to pay for principal office rent determinants in the corporate and non-corporate sectors.

A sample of properties located in the largest office market in Latin America is partitioned based on the average size of leasable units. This approach captures interactions between different groups of investors and occupiers, and is commonly adopted by local market practitioners due to lack of detailed information on market participants. The pricing schedules for these two groups of buildings are then empirically compared through hedonic regression analysis and parameter stability tests.

The regressions show that corporate and smaller occupier properties form distinct spatial and non-spatial submarkets, but that their temporal patterns are quite similar. Thus, these property-type segments can be classified as imperfect substitutes with distinct pricing schemes, but not as a unique market, as their pricing schedules are not generalizable.

The results imply that “office properties” are too complex and disparate to be reliably examined with a simple aggregate approach as practiced in developed office market research since the 1980s. The fragmented reality of office properties has important implications for investment decisions and real estate valuation.

This paper shows that the corporate office market exhibits distinct characteristics and key determinants of office price and rent valuation differ significantly between the corporate and non-corporate segments. The corollary of these findings is that market studies that require reliable estimates of price drivers may be enriched by modeling these two segmented markets separately. It is also important to note that this distinction cuts across the established A/B/C office space quality classification.

A great number of German companies are suffering an acute financial crisis. Financial optimisation of the substantial property holdings owned by German companies offers an opportunity to reduce costs and to free up capital. However, the demands on property for operational purposes create difficulties when optimisation is carried out exclusively for financial objectives. In this paper it will be shown, by means of an empirical investigation of real estate directors and financial managers of the leading German undertakings, that companies are failing to take the decisive step towards optimisation. The reason for this lies in inadequate internal preparations, manifested in the lack of a linkage between real estate strategy and corporate strategy. Property rights‐oriented analyses of real estate assets create new scope to refinance existing holdings, without sacrificing the important requirements of the units occupying them. This paper discusses the essential steps to a solution and explains the potentials that can be enhanced by a structured financial optimisation of property holdings.

The proportion of real estate in a non‐property company’s asset portfolio has increased to an extent where it has become an asset capable of enhancing corporate wealth. This initial study hopes to establish the foundation and provide background information on corporate real estate holding profiles of listed Singapore business firms. Using financial statement data and firm market values from 1987 to 1996, this paper provides an analysis of real estate holdings in both absolute and relative terms. Real estate holdings by business segment and asset subtype, growth in corporate real estate holdings over time; and key financial characteristics of corporate real estate (eg real estate as a percentage of shareholders’ equity and real estate relative to market value of the firm) are included in the paper.

Research in the late 1980s showed that in many corporate real estates users were not fully aware of the full extent of their property holdings. In many cases, not only was the value of the holdings unknown, but there was uncertainty over the actual extent of ownership within the portfolio. This resulted in a large number of corporate occupiers reviewing their property holdings during the 1990s, initially to create a definitive asset register, but also to benefit from more efficient use of space. Good management of corporately owned property assets is of equal importance to the management of other principal resources within the company. A comprehensive asset register can be seen as the first step towards a rational property audit. For the effective, efficient and economic delivery of services, it is vital that all property holdings are utilised to the best advantage. This requires that the property provider and the property user are both fully conversant with the value of the property holding and that an asset/internal rent/charge is made accordingly. The advantages of internal rent charging are twofold. First, it requires the occupying department to ‘contribute’ an amount to the business equivalent to the open market rental value of the space that it occupies. This prevents the treating of space as a free good and, as an individual profit centre, each department will then rationalise its holdings to minimise its costs. The second advantage is from a strategic viewpoint: by charging an asset rent, the holding department can identify the performance of its real estate holdings. This can then be compared to an internal or external benchmark to help determine whether the company has adopted the most efficient tenure pattern for its properties. rents by UK‐based corporate businesses and explains internal rents as a form of transfer pricing in the context of management and responsibility accounting. The research finds that the majority of charging organisations introduced internal rents primarily to help calculate true profits at the business unit level. However, less than 10 per cent of the charging organisations introduced internal rents primarily to capture the return on assets within the business. There was also a sizeable element of the market who had no plans to introduce internal rents. Here, it appears that, despite academic and professional views that internal rents are beneficial in improving the efficient use of property, opinion at the business and operational level has not universally accepted this proposition. This paper investigates the use of internal

Corporate activity in Ireland has experienced a significant growth as the economy has benefited from extensive inward investment. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the role of real estate in corporate decision making within Ireland. Corporate real estate issues are initially discussed as the contextual anchoring for a survey of corporate occupiers within both the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Findings indicate a high level of professional and practical experience in relation to real estate but this has not been fully exploited by companies in developing a proactive corporate strategy. Real estate plays a largely traditional role within organisations although it appears that differences exist between indigenous and externally parented companies. Comparisons are drawn with other similar surveys at an international level.

This paper compares the corporate property holdings of European and US corporations. The authors initially calculate standard benchmarks based on accounting and balance‐sheet information as of 1999, and then test for significant differences by two‐digit standard industrial classification levels between European and US firms. They follow the methodology of Johnson and Keasler (1993) and compare property, plant and equipment book values to a variety of non‐property balance sheet and market value figures. However, this paper extends previous research through a comparative analysis of 1,573 US firms to 2,182 European firms. The findings suggest there are significant differences between Europe and the USA, dependent on the specific benchmark and industrial sector. The conclusions postulate a variety of explanations of the corporate property differences and provide ideas for further research.

Corporations face new imperatives to reduce occupancy costs for both investment and corporate properties and to eliminate redundancies in their holdings. After mergers or acquisitions pressure to ‘rationalise’ the corporate portfolio are even more intense. This paper will explore an Eight Step Strategic Plan to evaluate alternative structures for corporate assets which are no longer contributing to return on equity or which may be considered surplus. It will also recommend a Special Purpose Vehicle to move assets off the corporate balance sheet.

A significant proportion of corporate real estate tends to be owned by corporate occupiers for historic reasons. This may be as a result of financial planning, the use of property as a hedge against inflation or the chance of capital gains from property redevelopment. Very often, however, property has accumulated through pure inertia or lack of management focus. Consequently, for many companies, real estate is not adding shareholder value and it is perceived to be ‘an operational pain’. This paper focuses on how corporate occupiers can manage the contribution their operational properties make to shareholder value.

This paper investigates the relationship of ownership structure and corporate performance of China’s listed property companies. Data from all the listed property companies on China’s stock market from 2000 to 2002 were used to study ownership concentration, type of controlling shares and their relation to corporate performance. The methodology applied is the conventional ordinary least square (OLS) model which is widely used in empirical studies on corporate governance. The study shows that ownership concentration has a positive association with corporate performance. Also that state shareholding is positively related to corporate performance; this is inconsistent with other empirical studies on the ownership structure and corporate performance of China’s listed companies and rflects the industry’s characteristics.

Regarding the immense real estate divestitures that have taken place over the last couple of years, some stakeholders have begun to wonder if these short‐term activities may affect the long‐term competitive advantage of a company. While it appears reasonable that property divestitures enhance the financial situation of a company from a so‐called owner perspective, there is no equivalent quantitative evaluation for the loss in space utilisation and flexibility from a user perspective. Consequently, real estate decision making is based upon an insufficient information basis and is dominated by the investment perspective. In order to better align corporate real estate and real estate investment functions better, this paper introduces a formal decision model which describes the situation of corporate real estate decision makers. They have to trade off entrepreneurial flexibility gained by real estate holdings against the financial opportunity cost of freeing up capital. Making use of a prototype decision situation, the paper demonstrates how the decision maker can improve the underlying information basis for property divestment decisions, using a real option approach. Hence, real estate decisions gain in two respects: they are more transparent and, more importantly, their design is more suitable if the company wants to employ real estate holdings to increase the overall value of the company.